Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: > On 09/25/2014 10:26 AM, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2014-09-25 10:25:24 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> If Heikki says it's ready, I'll test. So far he's said that it wasn't >>> done yet.
>> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/541c242e.3030...@vmware.com > Yeah, and that didn't include some of Tom's bug fixes apparently, per > the succeeding message. Which is why I asked Heikki if he was done, to > which he has not replied. I took a quick look at the two patches Heikki posted. I find the "separate offsets array" approach unappealing. It takes more space than the other approaches, and that space will be filled with data that we already know will not be at all compressible. Moreover, AFAICS we'd have to engrave the stride on stone tablets, which as I already mentioned I'd really like to not do. The "offsets-and-lengths" patch seems like the approach we ought to compare to my patch, but it looks pretty unfinished to me: AFAICS it includes logic to understand offsets sprinkled into a mostly-lengths array, but no logic that would actually *store* any such offsets, which means it's going to act just like my patch for performance purposes. In the interests of pushing this forward, I will work today on trying to finish and review Heikki's offsets-and-lengths patch so that we have something we can do performance testing on. I doubt that the performance testing will tell us anything we don't expect, but we should do it anyway. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
